Alone and Unobserved

Via AMERICAblog: Dan Froomkin has written a terrific, hard-hitting blog post about the Bush Administration’s current woes. You can read it on the Washington Post website.

It’s sometimes interesting to imagine what our country would be like if we had a real president, and a real presidential administration. But that usually gets really depressing after about three seconds (I mean, what if we had had a real president during the 9/11 crisis? on March 20, 2003? during the Katrina disaster?) and to lift our spirits, we are forced to make cruel but accurate fun of the one we’re currently stuck with. Like so.

[Link—via Dooce.com]

In better news, the House passed the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veteran’s Health and Iraq Accountability Act today, which will

1. Make sure that the troops currently deployed will be adequately trained and outfitted, and provide for the care of the veterans who are returning home.
2. Provide benchmarks for Iraqi involvement and American redeployment.
3. Set a firm deadline (March 1, 2008) for the end of U.S. military operations in Iraq.
4. Increase funding for the conflict in Afghanistan and for ACTUALLY COMBATING AL QAEDA.

[Link]

Of course, President Bush has announced that he will veto this bill. Guess he doesn’t support the troops.

Many people weighed in on Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s recent conviction. Yahoo! News has just a few. AMERICAblog, of course, has several more.

An interesting article on what progressives and the armed forces have (or should have) in common.

[Via AMERICAblog--read their take]

The war in Iraq has been utter folly from the very beginning, folly characterized by lies and mismanagement from the highest levels of command. And through it all, the President and his sidekicks have continually accused those of us who oppose the war of being unpatriotic and not supporting the troops.

But is it really patriotic to involve one’s country in an endless, bloody and costly war that in many ways has the opposite effect than what was intended? Is it patriotic to drain the country’s resources, erode the country’s diplomatic relations, promote terrorism and cause the deaths of thousands of the country’s servicemen and women?

Does “supporting the troops” mean sending them to die because of an outright lie, and without making plans to bring them home again? And for what? Political expediency? Personal gain?

Tantara Records, BYU’s record label, has posted a slideshow tribute to our servicemen and women, set to “Homeward Bound,” sung by the BYU Combined Choirs. As you watch it, remember that the only certain result of Bush’s “surge” plan is that more of our troops will live in privation in a hostile country for an indefinite period; virtually certain is that more of them will die. On the other hand, there is no good evidence that an increase of 21,000 troops will have any positive effect on the war, and there are strong arguments for the opposite.

Support the troops. Oppose the “surge.”

What a ridiculous parody of a legislative body. Iraq is in so much trouble. And honestly, we aren’t helping much.

[Via AMERICAblog.]

Think Progress has the text to Bush’s State of the Union address. AMERICAblog has the text to Senator Webb’s forceful response, and YouTube has the video.

Here is the text of the speech President Bush gave this evening.

Here is Pelosi, Reid, Hoyer and Durbin’s response.

Here is “AJ in DC”s further comments on why a troop surge is exactly the wrong idea.

And here is a brief dramatisation of the troops’ reaction to Bush’s brilliant new tactical plan.

[Via AMERICAblog, of course.]

When did it become okay for our government to treat other human beings like this, or like this? The best that can be said in both cases is that those in charge have no idea what they are doing; the worst involves language I have decided not to use in this blog. The vicious incompetence and egregious lack of basic decency and respect ought to be enough to convict everyone involved, in the court of public opinion, at least—so why is no one paying attention? Why have we not made our voices heard?

[Via AMERICAblog, as usual]

Americablog is, of course, following the deliberations of the Iraq Study Group very closely. Yesterday, blogger John Aravosis (AKA “John in DC”) broke the Group’s consensus down in simple terms for the rest of us.